Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: imissJG Date: Dec 2, 2010 10:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Please tell us what your one song by the Grateful Dead is that you play the most or the one that does that thing to your soul that only Jerry could produce with his magic?.....then explain whether or not the era in which it was played plays a factor in which rendition you choose and why?....(eg.Like"Peggy-O"and 89 on,because his Voice has a more mature tone and his passion for the lyrics seems overwelmingly more "true to life"and the later sound of his guitar`s give the solos more substance!..6/26/94,Vegas)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: user unknown Date: Dec 3, 2010 9:20am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Ripple...any version, live or studio
I never heard a Ripple I didn't like...except when covered by Jane's Addiction

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Dec 3, 2010 10:05am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

And then of course Box of Rain ... no, it just isn't possible to pick "one."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: portmcgroin Date: Dec 3, 2010 10:42am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Depends on the mood your in and the amount of time ya got to spare. I just got to blast live dead on vinyl real loud with no wife or kids home, a rare treat even the feedback sounded good.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: portmcgroin Date: Dec 3, 2010 9:40am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

the alligator jam from 4-29-71 esp where Jerrys guitar turns into a steel drum and starts belting out sounds that are not supposed to come out of a guitar. I like the sound in 71 alot, with or without pigpen. Something about the tone of Jerry's guitar and the country twang thing work for me. And about any JGB tune & 77 Sugaree's and Eyes of the world from 73-74.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Dead Surfer Date: Dec 3, 2010 12:07pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

A nice 89-90 Standing on the moon....12-6-89,3-30-90 my favorite versions.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jerlouvis Date: Dec 3, 2010 3:48pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

High Time from 6/19/76 for the interaction of Jerry,Phil and Keith.

http://www.archive.org/details/gd76-06-19.prefm.unknown.12077.sbeok.shnf

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: WillCo Date: Dec 3, 2010 3:32am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Attics Of My Life (1970-07-16).
http://www.archive.org/details/gd1970-07-16.set-2.sbd.ed.32575.sbeok.shnf
This is just so good, how to explain? Great churchy song to start with. It's got that delicate guitar work from Jerry that he used in his Zabriskie Point improvisations. There's a chamber music thing happening that gives space for Bobby's acoustic guitar and Phil's bass to share the lead. The vocal harmonies are well-written and almost perfectly executed. The phrasing is fascinating, reminds me of the best JGB performances.

Not sure I understood the rest of your question; 1970 was a great year, though unfortunately only a few shows were as well-recorded as this one. The band were clearly aware that the new songs and arrangements were top-notch, and played their hearts out.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Purple Gel Date: Dec 3, 2010 9:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Morning Dew, especially this version:

http://www.archive.org/details/gd1981-09-11.fob.nak300.walker.scotton.miller.95743.sbeok.flac16

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Reade Date: Dec 4, 2010 9:07am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

All one song if you look at it right.
The Help>Slip>Franklins here:
http://www.archive.org/details/gd1976-06-19.prefm.nickspicks.10186.shnf

Or the Dark Star on DP 11, Joisey City.

EDIT. Crap. Forgot the third leg of the Trifecta. A Jerry solo on Scarlet for the ages here, not to mention a superlative transition jam over to Fire (all done in a Gymnasium to boot. What a workout!):
http://www.archive.org/details/gd83-04-13.sbd.lai.23849.sbeok.shnf

This post was modified by Reade on 2010-12-04 17:07:53

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Skobud Date: Dec 3, 2010 6:55am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Koch alert.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Dec 3, 2010 8:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Bertha


Just because

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Dec 3, 2010 10:04am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

There's a case to be made, for sure.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: fenario80 Date: Dec 4, 2010 10:22am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Just too many choices, but if I had to pick just one it would have to be Peggy-O ... or Fire on the Mountain

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: unclejohn52 Date: Dec 3, 2010 6:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

For many years, my instant fix was China/Rider from E-72 - the solos are impeccably perfect and tight. I wore that vinyl out. Nowadays when I'm prepping food for dinner or doing dishes, Bertha/Good Lovin from April 78 makes me "get right." But for the true Jerry mainline fix, Tore Up is the song for sure - every lick in it is pure goodness.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Dec 3, 2010 10:02am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Glad to hear you say that about Tore Up! I figured everyone thought it was a sort of throw-away tune, not one you could get all worked up about. I really love JGB doing that song.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: unclejohn52 Date: Dec 3, 2010 10:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Tore Up is a classic blues, and this really swings. JG delivers a blues tutorial with every round of solo, building and building... really fun.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elkdog Date: Dec 3, 2010 11:44am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

I got two, though for the same reasons: Eyes of the World and Franklin's Tower. I'm a sucker for the bouncier tempos, but Jerry's lyricism on these tunes never fails to hit my mental "reset" button.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jds121291 Date: Dec 4, 2010 6:56am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

dicks picks 31 eyes really gets me, especially jerry's first two solos

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: shakeitupnow Date: Dec 3, 2010 5:31am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

The Other One -- for the Phil bombs. And Sugaree for the beauty of it all.
But it's the Jerry Garcia Band that really delivers -- again, I'll have to pick two: Tore Up and Let It Rock.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Dec 3, 2010 5:38am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Virtually anything from JGB - too hard to narrow it down.

These days I am obsessively playing Pure Jerry: Jerry Garcia Band Theatre 1839 San Francisco July 29 & 30 1977 -

And frankly in the "stranded on desert island for the rest of your life" scenario, this would be just fine. I'd get wistful for Bob and Phil periodically, but I'd be all right. How about this sequence: The Harder They Come, Gomorrah, Tore Up Over You, Tangled Up In Blue, My Sisters And Brothers.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: shakeitupnow Date: Dec 3, 2010 7:21am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

I like your song choices but I'd have to add Deal and Dear Prudence. And Don't Let Go. And Lay Down Sally.

This post was modified by shakeitupnow on 2010-12-03 15:21:56

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: direwolf0701 Date: Dec 3, 2010 8:26am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

gotta go with Scarlet without a doubt. Basically any from 77 and 78 really make my eyes roll back in my head and miss Jerry even more.

(though gotta admit your example of Peggy is a very very close second)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: whirlwind dreamer 65-95 Date: Dec 4, 2010 4:26pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

playing in the band.72-n-73 era like this one>>>http://www.archive.org/details/gd72-11-18.set2-sbd.cotsman.9002.sbeok.shnf :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: NorthStarDead Date: Dec 3, 2010 7:35am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

JGB Waiting for a Miracle, just love that tune

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: mcglone Date: Dec 4, 2010 7:09am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

hey northstar,

here's a bruce link you might like...

ian

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyk9AT6f_tE&;feature=related

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Dec 3, 2010 10:04am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

I don't even *know* that song, any links?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: shakeitupnow Date: Dec 3, 2010 10:36am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

since I know you will want this show once you hear it, here is the following from Sept 5, Hartford, CT 1989
http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=532010

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Dec 3, 2010 12:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Ooohhh. thanks

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: clementinescaboose Date: Dec 3, 2010 10:21pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

almost ANY rousing 1969 version of The Eleven sets me right.

the whole band are usually just rollicking their way thru this tune of course, and jer's leads are always riveting and get me pumped!...here's a real face stealer:

http://www.archive.org/details/gd69-02-22.sbd.owen.7860.sbeok.shnf

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jerrys beard Date: Dec 3, 2010 7:42am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Can't disagree with any of those mentioned, but want to throw in Stella Blue

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: fourempties Date: Dec 3, 2010 8:23pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Yes on Stella Blue. 3-31-87 RIPS. Also check out Candyman from this show.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: imissJG Date: Dec 4, 2010 7:32am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

i also find it hard to choose one over another"Peggy-O"was only one example of greatness!...."Stella Blue"is also on my playlist(10/1/94 rendition),as well as,"So Many Roads"(10/1/94~7/9/95)and "Standing on the Moon"(*9/10/91~*12/3/93).....my JGB picks would be,"Gommorah,""Tough Mama," and "Mission/Rain"....and many more really!

(*both dates for"SOTM",.. guest app.by Branford Marsalis)
(the"Stella"and"SMR"from 10/1/94Boston,both,treat us to Jerry returning to the end of each tune and repeating the chorus to each....though not heard of,its wasn`t common practice in later yrs....also"SMR"is lyrically different from others,due to the fact,Jerry uses"Heal,"rather than"ease"-->"his soul."...so cool!)

This post was modified by imissJG on 2010-12-04 15:32:56

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 4, 2010 1:19am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Sounds like an exam question. Can I fill up the whole blue book? Can I turn in my answer late?

I could write about CE>TOO from 68/69, since those just take me to a great place. Or acoustic Ripples, since IMO that's about the most profound song they ever did.

But then, there are a lot of times when I'm not looking for Intense or Deep, but feel the need for a Happy Dance. At which point the list gets really long: GDTRFB, Bertha, China>Rider, Sugar Magnolia ...

Then it occurred to me. That's the difference between the GD and other bands who stay on my playlist. For most bands/musicians, there will be particular songs that just grab me and I have to play over and over.

Emmylou Harris: Wayfaring Stranger. REM: The One I Love. Railroad Earth: Head. Del McCoury: All Aboard. Bonnie Raitt: Angel from Montgomery. CSN: For some reason, sometimes I just have to hear Cathedral.

Of course, I like lots of other things by all these folks too (!), but I find it easier to pick out a "miracle song" of sorts. Somehow, though, with the good old GD, there are just so MANY of those ... lots of little "miracles" for different times and moods ... which, I guess, is why I keep listening to so darned much of those guys :-)

Hey! Here's a thought! I could see if I could get a rise out of people here (hey, I'm the mom of a teenager, that attitude can be infectious) and champion Terrapin, cuz sometimes THAT does the trick ... but can I answer this exam question in appropriate blue-book style?

Ummm, how about this:

"One excellent example of a potential 'miracle song' would be the Terrapins from 1977, as exemplified, for instance, on 5/19/77 and 12/29/77. This was a year in which the band was tight, sweet, and able to maintain the measured and meditative tempo crucial for an effective Terrapin. Jerry's voice was still flexible and mellifluous, blending sweetly with the contemplative bass lines and Donna's subtle harmonic contributions, all of which combine to produce an excellent fenestration of the wall space." (I have included a few buzz words that worked well for me in college. I'm particularly proud of getting in the ever-effective "fenestration of the wall space.")

And A-HA! I just noticed the TRICK QUESTION! "Play the most ..." Why, that would be MAMU, of course. How could it not be? Thought you could trick us up on that, eh?

(See what happens when I'm lying around with a cold and everyone else is out of the house?!?)




This post was modified by AltheaRose on 2010-12-04 08:46:52

This post was modified by AltheaRose on 2010-12-04 09:10:11

This post was modified by AltheaRose on 2010-12-04 09:19:12

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: imissJG Date: Dec 4, 2010 6:04am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Pardon me.....I should`a figured it had too many words for you,and that complicated questions,such as the one posted,does only one thing..."Confuse you!"...I assume you felt it neccesary to spill your sarcasim and attempt at humor,but,its us,laughing at you!.....If there are too many words for you,next time...Keep your mouth shut,because it was a simple question,that required a simple answer...not a fuckin test!...and really,you haven`t a care for a thing past`77 anyway,so if it had been"a test"you surely,"would fail!....the question begging to be answered is,"what the fuck is wrong with you and why do i even bother explaining this?(for you won`t understand it anyway!)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 4, 2010 6:39am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Um, who are you talking to?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: imissJG Date: Dec 4, 2010 6:57am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

was I not,clear enough!....I read only a few threads,posted by only"ONE"person....if you`re still having trouble figuring it out...Then,you are in much more need of help then first thought.....(I`m sorry my"EXAM"wasn`t written up to your standards,next time anyone has a question...maybe running it by you,to assure that it`s ok to be posted and easy for you to understand...so to be,no Problem`s or debate`s on whether its"too scientific"or whatever the hell else you thought it represented..."OTHER THAN A SIMPLE FUCKIN QUESTION!"
~~and where you found anything"scientific"is beyond me!~~

i swear,so people act as if they run the show on this site.Needing all the threads to suit his or her likes and tastes for the topic stated withen.Who do you really think you`re fooling?....The sarcasim and judgements of another`s opinion and trying to be "funny",making silly comparison`s to other`s thought`s,is really,exactly what i expect from people with such a narrow look and vision upon the discussion`s intrduced in this forum!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 4, 2010 7:55am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Hey there. Take a deep breath. Really. No one is criticizing you, insulting you, trivializing your thread, slamming post-77, or anything of the sort. Sorry if my humor didn't communicate to you. I sincerely hope you get your miracle. Peace.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 4, 2010 2:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Whoaa...where'd that come from? I think the poster meant me, right? The one that "thinks he owns the site"? Damn, maybe I don't?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 4, 2010 2:42pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Oh--my bad; thought you meant me (as one of the resident scientists, and certainly one that takes threads off track more than anyone else here!).

I've answered your question many times here, but not lately, so here's my short and sweet answer:

StSt, without doubt, IMHO, is THE dead tune...of course, I'd go with something from the early era, but the lyrics (which clearly apply across eras) are a big part of the appeal for me.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 4, 2010 5:05am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

sorry, TS is my "gotago" song...yes, it was that bad (my joke).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 4, 2010 5:17am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Oh well. I came in late, and all the other essay topics were taken.

Anyway, the examples given included, I believe, 1994. So in the game of psych-out-the-prof, it was probably good to go with something later.

Besides, you know how important it is to challenge the received wisdom and do a bit of Revisionism if you want to make your scholarly mark. Or maybe it doesn't work that way in biology. I guess there are no Post-Modern Neo-Constructivist snake specialists ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 4, 2010 6:27am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

None that are employed anyhow; well done! My big pet peeve: post modernity. If it's all narrative, then by defn it's self-refuting, and thus--just like around here sometimes--why bother?

I mean really.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 4, 2010 6:43am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Rather like swallowing one's own tail. Which could mean that Oroboros is the first neo-constructivist snake specialist. Or neo-constructivist snake, anyway.

Btw you'd be relieved to know that my music-to-listen-to-in-order-to-cure-a-cold today (this being, of course, evening for me) was pretty much all '68. If it works, would it qualify as miracle music, or would curing a cold fall under the heading of science? (Although it's true that I didn't have a control.)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 4, 2010 10:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Ya know, Rose, you are perhaps the only one (well, besides Rob and Elb, but we talk more off line than here) that truly understands me on that point.

If I were any sappier, I'd quote Rick from Casablanca: "...beginning of a beautiful friendship..." or some such.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Dec 4, 2010 8:02am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

It's all narrative , isn't it ? Even that which can be measured is narrative . (Kant , Critique of Pure Reason )
Why bother ? Well that's a Sisyphean task ? Why not ?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 4, 2010 10:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Kant-smant. Heck no, it's not "all" narrative.

This pegs me as a relative (har) positivist with foundations of independent realities and such, but there you have it. There may not be "truth", but there are certainly measurable entities in this world, and we "hard scientists" (don't you love being able to call yourself the "hard scientists"? I do any how...) are always going to "have that" over the others...in simple terms, it's what allowed the hard sciences to advance so predictably over the ages whereas the "all narrative folks" are indeed, as Rosey so eloquently notes, busy catching up with their own tales (ooohhh--another good one, eh? I am on a roll...har, har).

Arrogant? Dogmatic?

You betcha.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Dec 4, 2010 10:56am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

My bro and mum wear the title of scientist as their , 'first religion', as I say to get under their skin . I admire your line , "Arrogant? Dogmatic? You betcha". Few scientists that I've met , and b/c of my families choices in careers I've met a few , appreciate the leap of faith that science , as belief system , is equivalent to a religious choice . But , regardless of which side of the fence you are on , you may have a losing hand . The same leap of faith that the welding torch of relative positivist use against religion , Kant ( dismissed?) is the same torch used against the 'religion' of science . Some value systems brought before my faith (usually with some predisposition) see holes -> lies , ect. However , the same could be said of many so called scientific theories and laws . When my bro gets the big guns out our arguments , I at least get in a , " Have you been to your Church lately ?"

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 4, 2010 1:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Well, the "truth" is, you couldn't have missed it any more dramatically: there is NO leap of faith. That's what demarcates science from nonscience. Only if you take "observation, the senses, require a leap of faith" can you go down that path...but that is such a futile one it ain't worth pursuing.

The point is that though scientists are dogmatic, arrogant, etc. (take me for example...well, actually, I am too objective to be a good example, patting myself on the back again, but you know enough of them to know it to be true) is entirely irrelevant. It's science as a PROCESS that sets it apart from all the others.

It isn't infallible, and it isn't necessarily ideal, BUT it's by far the BEST system we have for coming to understand the basic workings of the natural world. By defn, it is thus VERY limited in scope, and certainly doesn't deal with ANY of the really big and important issues of the world.

But, at least in this one small sense (har! I did again) it trumps all other approaches, hands down. Only folks that try to mix their belief systems with attempts to have it both ways get into trouble.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Dec 4, 2010 9:23pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

"..there is NO leap of faith."
".. a futile one it ain't worth pursuing."
Both phrases sound like a lot of smoke , and a cheap discount of one of the strongest arguments against the validity of Science -ism .
The process always sets one system of beliefs against the beliefs from another . I am not discrediting any certain belief system . Not admitting that science is a belief system is what I object to . And those on the scientific path scorn and claim theirs is the only way to really understand the world . ( Sounding strangely familiar to certain voices throughout history .) Metrics and charts are brought out like Bibles straining to make that final point where the non-believer crosses over .
Everyday is last roulette spin for many and for all of us one day . My chips are on Red 3 . I sure hope my number comes up . And I believe with all my heart that it will . It may not . Then as Paul describes , have pity on us for we are the greatest fools of all . You just never can really tell .

I find this to be very interesting ,
" Only folks that try to mix their belief systems with attempts to have it both ways get into trouble."
Are you referring to colleagues in your field ? , My bro ( marine bio.) said few followers of any other faith are in his field .

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 5, 2010 7:11am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

I think Rose has it right; you are mixing your metaphors when you compare science and faith in this way. Science is NOT a "belief system".

No right minded scientist uses "science" to formulate an outlook on life, etc., etc.

This is the false dichotomy you've constructed, and I am sorry to say, it's just wrong.

Science cannot "tell you" when a human being is alive (abortion debate), or when an individual is an individual, etc., etc., etc.

But, we've talked about these things enough for me to know that we are not gonna get ANYWHERE with the rehash. Sorry!

No, your bro is right--I was talking about folks that want to view science as you do, and have a religious bent, and then get into trouble trying to reconcile them. They are two entirely different domains of understanding. That's it. No conflict, no problems; but defn NOT both belief systems, in the normal sense of that term.

It really is like saying "what's wrong with the English language and my religion? Letts reconcile them!"

EDIT: how many spelling errors can one idiot make?

This post was modified by William Tell on 2010-12-05 15:11:21

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Dec 5, 2010 10:06am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

This may stir the pot . Thank God we are far down .
I believe the exact opposite to be true . I can view science objectively as best that I am able to understand it . I do not import any of my spiritual beliefs unto its conclusions .
Failed science , sometimes accepted for centuries as truth , usually doesn't make the history books . And the law of unintended consequences tarnishes even the top hits , even if it remains still unseen . Yet , I must believe in Darwin to leave the little kids table ? I have met few scientist's that want to have more then a three sentence conversation about questioning that theory . I am not a Creationist , so I'm not arguing for the other side . I don't think I could use the most inflammatory ( yet somehow cliche ) example of this inability to see how much religion is in the super structure that is scientific thought . I do love the fruits of technology , and I feel lucky to have been born in this time .
It doesn't mean for me I worship these things or the process from which they came from . It's interesting . At times extremely so .
My bro and I will never resolve our conversation , until one of us see's the light . I believe I will not remain dead forever , that the highest form of good is to love others , a code of personal and moral conduct and a sense of the arc of time . My bro believes in the primacy of science . He is a hard science guy too , WT . The scientific method , peer review , why don't I accept Darwin ( man , a bunch of that ) and how could I blithely look upon all science when there are laws and review and reproducibility ? Thank God we love each other .
O.K. I gotta stop for now . Good conversation if you want to continue .

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 5, 2010 2:53pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Sorry--you've missed the essence of my pt, and we are talking past each other.

Science is a process; "failed science" is exactly that, and you are DEAD wrong to say it doesn't make the history books. That is what makes science different; science in fact only advances by failure. This is the philosophical basis of falsificationist approaches: we can "know" something to be false, but we can never prove something to be "true". Science does not "prove" things to be true, and advances when things are "refuted" and discarded. Not sure where you heard that science doesn't teach those lessons--that's "science 101".

You are working from a very flawed defn of science. Here is the defn:

1) it must be TENTATIVE (you clearly dropped the ball with "failed science comment"...sorry to be harsh, but ya did).

2) it must be FALSIFIABLE (best scientific statements that is; must be testable, and potentially falsfied to be called science).

3) it must be EXPLANATORY. Duh.

4) it must adhere to natural laws/real world observation (eliminates "supernatural/singular/miracle" events).

So, I see now why we part company so quickly. Seriously, you need to read up on how science as a process is defined. I can't say this without offending you, but you are really ignorant of the basics. Can't put it any other way.

When scientists thought that the world was flat, this wasn't "bad science" it was "good science" for the day. The beauty of science is that once it was proved wrong--falsified--it was replaced.

The current theories and paradigms are those that are strong statments of explanatory value that have been tested repeatedly and not been falsified. They stand til they are unable to (ie, refuted by new data).

So, failed science as you call it is exactly how science progresses. Our history is FILLED with past theories that have been replaced. Science is TENTATIVE, always open to revision when necessary.

This is why scientists, who often are NOT tentative (it's human nature; you do better if your pet theory is supported, not falsified, etc.) are one thing, but science as a process, what I am talking about, is another. Science benefits those that refute theories of others, even if it takes a generation or two for replacement.

Finally, you continue to ignore the fact that your belief system, and my belief system (secular humanist) have NOTHING to do with this sterile notion of science as a process.

I think, if I may, that you want to point out many scientists are also atheists and agnostics, but this has nothing to do with "science as a process" per se. Of course it can't, as it deals with a very narrow domain, and none of the impt questions in life. One might argue that folks that become scientists tend toward areligious belief systems, but that's a CORRELATION not CAUSE and EFFECT as you seem to have assumed.

That's what you should recognize. Mixing the two is what causes endless circular arguments like this.

Really sorry, but there's no other way to put it...If I come off as way over the top it's because I've been teaching this crap for 30 yrs. And, again, my apologies for it sounding so bad, but there are fundamental assumptions here that are causing all the problems, and I can't seem to convey that essence...

No hard feelings--this blather flows out at a high rate without any thought whatsoever; it's second nature with how much I've worked on it, so don't think I am overly upset or any such thing. It's much easier than my WWII trivia!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Dec 6, 2010 10:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Are you kidding ? This is one of the most interesting conversations here in a while .
WT , you should tell me how you really feel .:-)
Even so called hard science can still be manipulated , informed by culture . I don't think you can ultimately take the human out of the numbers or process . I think the linkage that you spoke of , non believing and a scientist , has blended onto something more . Something very much like a religion . You ably ( better be after 30 years ) sliced and diced my arguments , but with your narrative and books . To me , there are not two separate ways to look at science , but one . That contain leaps of faith , dogma , saints , ect. It reminds me of Plato's philosopher king's .
I just want an admission that this is a faith , a belief system . The passion in answering that question is almost always high when I've asked it to a scientist . Why ?
And there lies the divide . On your chessboard it's checkmate . I'm saying that you are playing the wrong game entirely . Resolution ? I don't know ? I don't think so , but I am a bear of little brain sometimes (all the time ?) Maybe if not there is always amiable toleration . Like IA when it's 'running' well .

I've been saving this .( Can we talk some history during break ?)
I have discovered Epameinondas (Theban general) , destroyer of Sparta , liberator of the helots . Hanson , The Soul of Battle

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 6, 2010 12:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

OK, it's getting a little exasperating...you're mixing your responses here with multiple components of the discussion so far. Please allow me to separate and simplify, and please do it as well, okay? Just humor me.

First, note I already addressed how society impacts science (eg, Kuhn), primarily through it's impact on scientists. But "science" the process, overcomes this, slowly, in fits and starts, but it does. Period. Sure, we address various issues of importance of the day, but that doesn't change the defn of science at all. Just the body of knowledge that builds up.

Second, you do concede we now know the Earth is round, right? But that it was "good science" to think it was flat ~ 500 yrs ago? That's progress. And, progress in this discussion if you'll just say "yes, I see that as significant".

Now, back to the main pt: Think about the rules of math: simple, agreed upon means of doing things, right? Leap of faith? Only if you want to say the starting assumptions are. Fine if you want to call it that. But it's not the same as a leap of faith to a belief system as you suggested originally; it's apples and oranges. When scientists practice science, there is no "leap of faith" except in the trivial sense of "natural laws apply, things can be observed, repeatability is possible," etc., etc.

So, third: science is thus keenly different from nonscience, as a method. Do you now grasp that the tentative, falsifiability, explanatory criteria is what allows it to be demarcated from nonscience? I need a "yes" or "no" or we can just call it quits.

This has been my main pt. Recognize the method of science. It is independent of all the dogmatic, strong willed scientists that practice it.

They are the ones that you have a problem with, I think, but it's not with science per se, just like you don't have a problem with the methods of math or physics, right?

I know it's sounding arrogant and patronizing, but you do recall we covered this ground before? I am sorry to say, I've made the same points, and yet you pose the same questions, a few months later...so, it is starting to seem futile to continue.

Sorry dude. Head meets wall only so many times before it starts to hurt too much.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Dec 6, 2010 4:09pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Jeez WT . Don't bang your head against the wall .
I kinda thought I wrapped it up with amiable tolerance .
Somehow , I get the feeling we won't be talking about history anytime soon .
I am going to go for this b/c I do not know if an email would reach you . Looking back , I can not understand the decline of our relationship on IA from the spring to now . Or other places . I can not recall one post from either of us to the other that was negative . Some folks just get under an others skin . I don't know , but there has been a distinct change .
I would gladly take this offline , if you want . I wish things could go back to the way they were .S.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 6, 2010 7:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

I tried to respond to your queries; got more questions; simplified it as best I could; more off subject questions; asked a final set of questions to bring it back to topic; you decided not to answer.

What else could I have done? What else could that lead to but frustration? Seeing we've covered it before in part(checked the prior exchanges...yikes!), I think we should call it quits. Definition of insanity biz, right? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? But, without you clearly defining what you mean, without simple answers to simple questions, we just go round and round with me guessing at what you're getting at.

This is how it feels to me: "Tell, what is the color 'red'?" I define 'red' by perception, then by reception, then by physics...you say "but what does 'red' mean?" I reply by describing the different ways red is understood in the animal/human/plant worlds...then you say "but I don't believe 'red' can be understood by natural law" or some such...

Take it easy--I'll be outta touch for a while, but we should probably just drop it. I know I want to--never admitted that before!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Dec 6, 2010 7:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Amiable toleration , WT .
I agree on letting it go . And there it all goes .
Take care

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 7, 2010 5:04am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Good deal; ya know, there is a second alternative: one's right, one's wrong.

This one, I know. But no sweat.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Dec 6, 2010 1:04pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Day Job???

http://panicstream.net/streams/eric_clapton/2010_05_31/player.html

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Dec 6, 2010 2:05pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Science? You want science? Go to the 5:15 mark in this clip and get schooled.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKKBAoSm8XA

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 6, 2010 3:49pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Ha; well, at least you and BD can keep it humorous, but I tell it, it's getting old...I may really have to retire again, eh?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 4, 2010 10:42pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

But science doesn't claim to give ultimate answers. It's just a process of observation, testing and description.

That's why belief systems that latch onto the name of science for the power it wields in the contemporary mind (such as Marxism and creationism) aren't scientific, no matter how much they toss around the word "science." If an idea/hypothesis cannot be disproven, or if a certain endpoint is assumed/required (e.g. the truth of Marxism, the literal truth of the Bible, etc), there can't possibly be any "science" involved.

That doesn't mean the idea can't be TRUE; personally, I don't think many insights into how society works and people experience the world (or, of course, into Ultimate Reality) CAN be tested "scientifically" in any meaningful way. But if being untestable doesn't discredit a concept, neither does being unable to test Absolutely Everything discredit science or make it "just a belief."

Of course, if someone insists that "only the things that science can demonstrate are true," THAT is a belief system. But again, that doesn't make science itself a belief system. Though certainly the name "science" (and all those charts and graphs) can be used manipulatively all the time to legitimate or market ideas, obfuscate, etc.!

And I can prove all that. As soon as I find the charts.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 5, 2010 6:14am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

I hope you don't mind if I say I wanna give ya a big hug right now...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 5, 2010 7:00pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

I think you'll have to hug Micah, too. He might be upset.

No, I don't really think so. But in this particular example of discourse, you're definitely talking past each other ... I think I'll have to whip out those charts to show what I mean :-)

Incidentally, if you think some of this can be hard to communicate when you don't share a basic "language," I've had roughly this same conversation more than once recently (the Marx part, anyway) in Nepali. I probably made about as much of an impact, LOL. (Must find those charts! With good visuals! Assuming visuals are cross-cultural. Which, actually, they're not.)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 5, 2010 7:12pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Actually, we covered this before...I hate to say...oh well, I won't use the "word", but I think SDH is right about "arguing on the web"...I can explain all I want, but we aren't going to get anywhere with such different starting assumptions and mixed models on one end.

Of course, you'll understand that in essence, science as a way of knowing (about very limited things--the natural world), is easily explained. It's only a set of rules.

What micah objects to is the belief system that he associates with scientists, and thinks, I assume, that "science" causes this, which of course, it does not. So, I think he mixes these together so that he has a problem to attack.

This all sounds very condescending, of course, but really, science is nothing but a simple formula. It really is akin to saying "mathematics sez 2 + 2 is 4" (me) and he says "how come mathematicians believe this stuff that I don't agree with?" The argument ISN'T about mathematics, it's about the conflated belief systems...

Seriously. All of that makes him very angry, I know, but it's so simple it can't be watered down and made "softer" neither now, nor when we covered it twice before.

You think he needs a hug? I need to get my head outta this wall!

JK. It's no biggie.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 5, 2010 7:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Ah well. You're preachin' to the choir here. I'm not a scientist, but I've read about it :-)

Not saying Micah hasn't. But I do have relatives who say things like "we don't know that Darwin was right." At which point, where do you begin? By asking them to define what they think is meant by "Darwin" and "right"? They can't really do that, because there's another unstated emotional component involved; it's not really about science or Darwin but about deeply held personal beliefs that can't get separated out of the whole discussion. So you can never define terms, because there's a whole iceberg under the surface there.

I'd never question beliefs; I just don't see a need to connect the beliefs to whether or not "Darwin" (whatever is meant by that) was "right" (whatever is meant by that). But like you said, it gets conflated. Which is not a critique of my relatives or micah or whoever. It's just how I see things.

One good thing about snakes, I guess, is that they don't argue with you! At least not verbally :-)









Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: unclejohn52 Date: Dec 6, 2010 6:06am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Unfortunately though, this type of fundamental issue spills over into real life, affecting important problems we face as a nation and and a global tribe. Not to throw fuel on the fire, but things like "global climate change" and which textbooks to use in schools -count me in the science camp. Difficult for facts and logic to win out over all the misinformation out there.

Love this type of discussion... group hug to all.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 6, 2010 8:45am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Yup; the fundamental issue is to separate science as a process, which really is no different from mathematics, or physics, etc., from "scientists", much less "what to do with the information?".

Then, there's the correlation, which does upset many: scientists in general are agnostic/atheistic/humanists, and folks conclude this is because of "science" but it ain't necessarily so.

The crap I have to hear from folks about "science sez this and science sez that" is just absurd. The findings (body of knowledge portion of science) are one thing, and the process (science as a way of knowing) is another, BUT what WE do with it all, is yet again another beast altogether.

Glad you enjoyed it down here in the depths of the big board!

PS: the fact is that much of this conflation can be traced, in part, to the neocons that like to mix "family values" with politics, etc., etc., etc. Liberals do it as well, but science works best when these boundaries are well noted. We as a society could "decide" that we will do X, Y or Z, and thus have dire consequences for this or that aspect of the environment...the job of scientists is simply to make clear what the alternatives MAY be. Science, in and of itself, is "value free" (though as Kuhn pts out, scientists are not, of course, and there are lots of social influences on scientists, etc.).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 6, 2010 5:33am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

Now I think I want more than a hug from you.

JK; seriously, that describes it quite well.

Science is just a methodology. And the theories developed by it supported to varying degrees. You can't really pick and choose and say "I think I'll keep the second law of thermodynamics cause I like that idea, BUT I am not putting natural selection in my cart!"

It is just unreal that a "thinking" individual can function in this fashion, and often I think they are not...really...thinking, nor functional. Har, har...argh.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Dec 4, 2010 7:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song (Hey, prof, does this work for the blue-book exam?)

I've got a nice middle ground here. It's not "all" narrative -- OK, maybe Kant is all narrative -- but the "all" has to be communicated by narrative/discourse, and you certainly can't get beyond that as a human being. Which is limiting, of course. Particularly if you're a philosopher and confuse a well-constructed logical argument with The Truth. (For instance, when the well-constructed argument proves at the end that The Truth is that it's all discourse. Whoops! Just ate my tail there!)

As for science being a leap of faith ... well, the belief in it certainly can be, as Karl Marx so conveniently discovered. (Hey, folks! Believe in THIS idea, because it's SCIENTIFIC!) Of course, that's not really about "science" per se (e.g., the process) but about the ideas people hold about science. Which brings us back to narrative.

The faster we go the rounder we get ...

(Nice to always have a quote handy, lest this be confused with derailing :-) )



Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: pequastogy Date: Dec 4, 2010 11:14am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Although I'd have to exhaust myself first with 3 plus hours of
dancing to the dead (An idea for a reality show?) I can remember several Attics Of My Life or Knockin on Heaven's Door that closed a show that made me extremely satisfied and at peace.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Dec 4, 2010 2:52pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Day Job

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Finster Baby Date: Dec 3, 2010 5:04am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: your goto GD song when you need a miracle?

Hard to pick just one....
But if forced to, I go with Goin' Down the Road Feelin Bad.
Any era will do, but the early ones are my favorite.

This is just a really feel good song for me and lightens my mood any time I hear it.